| 5, Mor. 411F, taking νματα in its most common sense; cf. Acts 2:17); philosophers could similarly speak of an internal πηγ του γαθο (Marcus Aurelius 7.59), or of education as a πηγ of all goodness (Plutarch Educ. 7, Mor. 4C), or of «springs» (πηγς) of philosophy (Eunapius Lives 460–461; Porphyry Marc. 4.54) or virtue (Maximus of Tyre Or. 34.4). Egyptian religion linked Nile water with life after death in some sense (Wild, Water, 97–99); the fountain is praise in Odes So1. 40(a Christian work). 5408 Akiba in Sipre Deut. 48.2.7. Cf. disciples as «cisterns» that never lose a drop (m. " Abot 2:8). Pancaro, Law, 482–85, sees Jacob " s well as a symbol of Torah. 5409 CD 6.3–5. Whoever rejects this well forfeits life (CD 3.16–17). Others also cite CD 19.34 (which tends to revise an earlier text) and 3.6 for Torah as the source of living waters (Coetzee, «Life,» 64; Driver, Scrolls, 518). 5410 Cf. Odeberg, Gospel, 150–51; Brown, John, 1:176; Coetzee, «Life,» 64; Whitacre, Polemic, 86–87. In some manuscripts of T. Jud. 24:4, πηγ ζων refers to the Messiah, but this may well be a Christian interpolation. 5412 Among Greek philosophers, cf., e.g., Socratics Ep. 25 (allegedly from Phaedrus to Plato): Phaedrus δψων for philosophy. The biblical worship tradition speaks of thirsting for God ( Ps 42:1–2; 63:1 ); cf. Matt 5:6. 5415 Cf., e.g., drinking as a surrogate for an immersion pool, in which she as a nonconverting Samaritan would be unwelcome (Derrett, «Purity»); cf. the argument for drinking as baptism in 1Cor 12 (Cuming, «Epotisthèmen») and (rightly) against it (Rogers, «Epotisthêmen»); drinking from a mythical river (Pausanias 9.39.8) after initiatory purifications (9.39.5–7). 5416 Presumably with Torah. Boring et a1., Commentary, 263, who cite this text, date its final redaction to the fourth century C.E. 5418 See comment on 2:6; Avigad, Jerusalem, 139; Yadin, Masada, 166; Sanders, Jesus to Mishnah, 31–32, 214–27. Aseneth requires δατι ζντι to purify her hands and feet when converting (Jos. |
| Jesus» tears (11:35) would be considered pious as well as compassionate. 7642 As noted above, Jewish people considered sharing in others» lamentation a religious duty. But showing lavish emotion at the appropriate time, especially grief over bereavement, was considered praiseworthy behavior throughout the ancient Mediterranean world 7643 and could move an audience. 7644 Ancient writers would describe a herós tears for others» pain as part of his praiseworthy behavior, 7645 or the tears of those who loved and sacrificed themselves for others. 7646 (Many philosophers and moralists, who counseled against the value of grief, proved to be the exception; 7647 some others shared their perspective, 7648 though this was probably more often a stereotypical counsel than a genuine expectation. 7649 Brave heroes might also hold out against tears, refusing to be deterred from a mission.) 7650 One might weep out of sympathy for others» grief, though not grieving for the situation itself (e.g., Ps.-Callisthenes Alex. 2.21); thus Moses, initially not mourning over his own imminent death, was said to have been moved to tears by his people weeping so much over it (Josephus Ant. 4.321). 7651 That this tradition about Moses was widely known is not likely; that it reflects broader feelings in the milieu about the heroic protagonist " s tears is virtually certain. It is thus not surprising that those who have come to mourn with Mary recognize that Jesus cared deeply for Lazarus (11:36; cf. 11:5). That John contrasts some «others» (11:37) with those who praised his love (11:38) suggests that the latter group, while perhaps recognizing his love, doubted his power to have changed the situation. Some scholars suspect that this is the reason for Jesus» possible «anger» in 11(see comment on 11:33). 6. The Miracle (11:38–44) Lazarus " s rescucitation prefigures Jesus» resurrection for the Fourth Gospel, and parallels of language between the two are more than fortuitous, such as the stone (11:38; 20:1), the essential role of a woman close to the deceased (11:39; 20:1–18), and the wrappings (11:44; 20:6–7). Nevertheless, the primary purpose of the parallels may be to draw attention to the equally explicit contrasts between the two. In Lazarus " s case, people must remove the stone (11:39), but Jesus» resurrection produces an immortal body following a different order of existence (cf. 1Cor 15:42–44 ; Phil 3:21 ); his resurrection may leave the grave clothes untouched (20:5, 7) and allows him to enter closed rooms (20:19, 26). 7652 |
| The vehemence that Jesus» promise of 8provokes in 8suggests ancient cultural assumptions unfamiliar to most modern readers; Jesus» hearers find implicit in his promise a statement of their spiritual inadequacy. Their counterclaim to be children of Abraham (8:33), developed further as the dialogue progresses (see comment on 8:39), reflects issues of contention between Jewish Christians and traditional Judaism far earlier than John " s day (Q material in Matt 3:9; Luke 3:8). Their reaction about freedom requires even more exploration in ancient concepts unfamiliar to most modern readers. Some scholars suggest that Jesus» hearers in 8understand freedom in a political sense. 6732 Many ancient writers indeed applied the terms for freedom and bondage in their national or political senses. 6733 Writers used λευθρια and its equivalents for just and appropriate remedies under the law, 6734 or not being subject to absolute monarchs 6735 or to another people, 6736 and spoke of subjection to tyrants 6737 or other peoples as slavery. 6738 Capitulation to defeat was itself slavery (perhaps mental slavery; Diodorus Siculus 33.25.1). Thus the followers of Judas the Galilean expressed an irrepressible yearning for freedom because they affirmed only God as their master (δεσπτης, Josephus Ant. 18.6). Jewish people believed that Rome had granted Jewish communities freedom and autonomy (ελευθρων και αυτονμων, Diodorus Siculus 40.2.1). A claim that the Israelites had never been subjugated politically, however, would be absurd. 6739 Plainly, Israelites endured slavery in Egypt; 6740 they also were said to have endured it in Babylon. 6741 Following biblical teachings (e.g., Judg 2:14; 3:8; 4:2; 10:7 ; 1Sam 12:9 ), Jewish teachers affirmed that God subjected the Israelites to foreign bondage when they disobeyed him. 6742 But if pagans insulted Israel with the charge of long-term bondage (Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.125–128), a Jewish apologist could respond that nearly all nations have been subdued and ruled by others (Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.127). Under Herod Jews were less subjugated than other nations (Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.134). |
| 18:31). This underlines the primary responsibility of the leaders of Jesus,» and John " s audiencés, own people. The greatest irony, however, is the claim that the law demands Jesus» execution for claiming to be God " s Son (19:7) when in fact the rest of the Gospel demonstrates that Jesus provided ample evidence that he was God " s Son (10:34–38) and that the law supported his claims against theirs (e.g., 5:45–47). 3A. «Behold the Man» (19:4–5) Whether or not one accepts a proposed chiastic structure for this section, 9998 these two presentations of Jesus by Pilate to «the Jews» are closely parallel, with Pilate offering titles for Jesus and with «the Jews» responding (19:4–7, 13–16; cf. 18:39). 9999 Some suggest that «man» (19:5) is a messianic title; 10000 the late Samaritan text Memar Marqah applies the title frequently to Moses, the Samaritan messianic prototype. 10001 But the title is too rare for us to infer that it was probably known both to John and to his audience; «man» was also an occasional euphemism for «God,» 10002 but it is unlikely that John alludes to that usage here. Nevertheless, in the context of the soldiers» mockery (19:2–3), «Behold the man!» probably parallels 19and functions as a mock royal acclamation; Jesus stands before them in royal apparel (not explicitly removed as in Mark 15:20 ), and Pilate mocks the ceremony of acclamation (acclamatio). 10003 S Some sources use «That is he!» as an acclamation; 10004 here John may well expect the more biblically literate members of his audience to recall Samuel " s acclamation of Israel " s first king with identical words: «ιδο νθρωπος» (1Sam 9LXX). 10005 In the final analysis, however, John is less interested in the mocking significance of Pilatés title in his tradition than in Jesus» opponents speaking unwitting and ironic truth. Thus, in the context of the Fourth Gospel, the title «man» epitomizes Jesus» enfleshment: 10006 Jesus revealed God " s glory in his mortality, especially in the ultimate expression of that mortality, his death (see comment on 1:14). |
| Given the language of divine wisdom earlier in the chapter (see esp. comment on 6:35) and the book (see comment on 1:1–18), Jesus» death is «the supreme revelation of God " s wisdom,» and one embraces this by «coming to» and «believing in» him. 6231 John clarifies this point further in 6(see comment). That early Christians would experience and articulate this in terms of their remembering Jesus» death at the Lord " s Supper ( 1Cor 11:26 ) is only natural, but should not be held to delimit John " s intention. 4B. The Text Their arguing among themselves (6:52) reflects the motif of division Jesus introduces into the synagogue community (7:43; 9:16; 10:19); they interpret him overliterally (6:52b), like most others in the Gospel (3:4; 4:15; 11:12), but Jesus makes no effort to clarify his parabolic language for the crowds. 6232 «How can…?» (Πς δναται, 6:52) will remind the attentive reader of earlier objections, particularly of Nicodemus (3:4, 9; cf. 9:16). Both to Nicodemus and to the present interlocutors Jesus responds with the prerequisite for eternal life. 6233 «Life in yourselves» (6:53) refers not to self-generating life (5:26) but to having in them the life Christ brings (cf. 5:40–42; 6:25, 33, 35, 40, 47–48, 51; 8:12), like branches on the vine. He refers, as in the parable of the vine (15:1–8), to abiding in him and he in the believer (6:56). But though Christ is self-existent in 5(see comment on 5:26), he is also dependent on the Father in 5:26; the believer likewise depends continually for life on Jesus, the believer " s source (6:57; cf. Rev 7:17; 22:2). The remaining lines of this section develop further the theme already established by this point: ingesting Jesus is a prerequisite for eternal life (6:54; cf. 4:12–14). This eternal life includes the resurrection at the «last day» (6:54), an eschatological image (6:39–40, 44; 11:24; 12:48). (The repetition of «raising up» from 6in 6and the repetition of 6in 6make the thoughts emphatic; see note on repetition at 6:51.) As he is the «true» light (1:9) and «true» vine (15:1), so is he «true» bread (6:32) and «true» food (6:55). 6234 John uses «true» here not in the Platonic sense of a heavenly prototype or pattern for the earthly counterparts; he may instead use it in the sense of that which is fully genuine as opposed to other figurative uses of such phrases (perhaps applied in the case of light and bread to Torah) that were incomplete without him. 6235 The one who eats– probably, who continues to subsist (τργων, present active participle)– " abides» in Jesus and the reverse (6:56); this is Johannine language for perseverance (6:27; 8:31; 15:4–7). 6236 In 6:57, Jesus» dependence on the Father for life (5:26) becomes the model for disciples» dependence on him (cf. 15:4–5). Response and Meaning (6:59–71) |
| 6486 Jub. 16:27, 29; 18:19; 2Macc 10:6–7; cf. Deut 16:14, 15 ; Lev 23:40 . 6487 E.g., Apol1. Κ. Tyre 39 (which suggests that people also visited strangers during the festival, 39–40); Diogenes Laertius 2.68; Willis, Meat, 61. 6488 Cf.Dihle, «Fête.» 6489 E.g., m. Sukkah 5(given its most likely sense); b. Sukkah 51ab, 53a. 6490 See Moore, Judaism, 2:44–45 (comparing the functions of libations among pagans); Ringgren, Religion, 190; Harrelson, Cult, 69; Uval, «Streams»; cf. Zech 14:16–19. 6491 On winter rains, see comment on John 10:23 . 6492 E.g., 1 En. 76:4–13; 2 Bar. 10:11. 6493 Often compared with the eschatological resurrection because rain also brings life, e.g., b. Ber. 29a; 33a; Šabb. 88b; Ta c an. 2ab; 7a; p. Ber. 5:2; Ta c an. 1:1, §2; Gen. Rab. 13:6; 73:4; Deut. Rab. 7:6; Pesiq. Rab. 42:7. 6494 See further Sipre Deut. 41.6.4; thus, in later sources, repentance (Gen. Rab. 13:14), obeying Torah (Num. Rab. 3:12), the temple service ( " Abot R. Nat. 4A), tithing (Pesiq. Rab Kah. 1:4), Sabbath observance (Song Rab. 7:2, §2), or charity (Lev. Rab. 34:14) brings rains. 6495 E.g., 1 En. 101:2; Pss. So1. 17:18; Josephus Ant. 8.318–319; Lev. Rab. 35:10. 6496 Jdt 8:31; Josephus Ant. 14.22; m. Ta c an. 3:8; t. Ta c an. 2:13; " Abot R. Nat. 6A; b. Ta c an. 8a; 19b-20a; 23a-26a; p. Ta c an. 1:4, §1; 3:9, §§6–7; 3:11, §4; cf. 1 Kgs 17:1; 18:41–46; Jas 5:17–18. Among Greeks, e.g., Diogenes Laertius 8.2.59; Iamblichus Bab. St. 10 (Photius Bibliotheca 94.75b); on rainmakers in some traditional societies, see, e.g., Mbiti, Religions, 234–36. 6497 " Abot R. Nat. 4A; b. Ta c an. 19b, bar.; Pesiq. Rab. 52:3; see comment on obedience and rain, above. Greeks might also undergo rituals (cf. Iamblichus V.P. 10.51) or require sacrifice to propitiate a deity who sent drought (Pausanias 2.29.8; Alciphron Farmers 33 [Thalliscus to Petraeus], 3.35, par. 1–2; rejected by Seneca Nat. 4.7.3). 6498 E.g., t. Sukkah 3:18; Ecc1. Rab. 7:14, §3; Song Rab. 7:2, §2. 6499 M. Ta c an. 1:1; b. B. Mesfa 28a (R. Gamaliel); p. Ta c an. 1:1, §§1–10. Prayers for rain appear in the OT (1 Kgs 8:36; cf. Jer 14:22 ); twice in the Amidah (second and ninth benedictions); and in Jdt 8(Johnson, Prayer, 13–14). |
| 288 Just. M. Dial. 39: προεφητεθη αχμαλωτεσαι ατν μς π τς πλνης κα δοναι μν δματα. 289 This is not a fresh quotation, but part of the comment on the passage before quoted: “The Lord . . . in Sinai in his sanctuary: he ascended upon high.” Irenæus seems to have taken it as though it were “in Sion in his sanctuary.” 291 Ps. XXIV. 8 ff. Justin " s interpretation (Dial. 36) makes the humble form of our Lord " s humanity (ειδς κα τιμος) the reason why He is not at once recognized. The interpretation given by Irenaeus corresponds to that of the Ascension of Isaiah: see Introd. p. 43. 295 See the comment on the same text in IV, lvi. 3 f.: “Si autem libertatis lex, id est, verbum Dei ab apostolis qui ab Hierusalem exierunt annuntiatum,” etc. 302 Almost the same comment is found in IV, lv. 4, where the same combination of texts is made: “Quisquis judicatur, ex adverso adstet; et quisquis justificatur, appropinquet puero Dei (Arm. Domini); et væ vobis . . . in altissimis.” 305 Isa. LXIII. 9. – Cf. c. 94. In III, xxii. 1 we have; “Neque senior (πρσβυς LXX) neque angelus.” 308 IV, xxv. 2.: “per omnes illos transiens Verbum,” in connection with “the voice of many waters.” 309 The Greek doubtless was: οδ πνεμα γιον πτισεν ατος: and the context shows that πνεμα must be taken as accusative. For the general thought of the passage cf. III, xviii. 1 f. 311 After διαθκην the words καινν, ο κατ τν διαθκην must have been missed by the scribe or translator. “The covenant of the testament” is only a double rendering of διαθκην: such double renderings occur several times in this quotation, but I have not retained them in every case. 325 Both the German translations take the passage to mean: «granting many children to the Church, the assembly of the firstborn.» But it is hard to get this out of the Armenian text, which has «first» and not «first-born.» It seems certain that there is a contrast between «the Church» and «the first Synagogue» (whose husband was the Law, as is said below). The text can easily be amended so as to give the meaning required. Cf. IV, XLVIII. I. f: «duae synagogae...fructificantes...filios vivos vivo Deo »; III, VI. I: « Ecclesia, haec enim est synagoga Dei.» For the quotation and its interpretation cf. Just. M. Ap. I, 53. |
| Moses did see God ν εδει (Num 12LXX), but they have not ( John 5:37 ); Moses heard God " s voice ( Num 7:89 ), but they have not heeded it ( Deut 8:20 ). In this context one hears the Fathers voice only if one has heard the life-giving voice of the Son (5:24–25); 5928 one has life (5:40) only in the same way (5:24–25). Jesus» disciples, like Moses of old, get to see part of God " s glory, but Jesus» enemies cannot (cf. 14:21–23; see comment on 1:14–18). 5929 Jesus is God " s word (hence his voice; 1:1–18) and his image (14:7–9; cf. 2Cor 4:4 ; Col 1:15; Heb 1:3), like divine Wisdom in Jewish tradition (Wisd 7:26) or Philós Logos. 5930 Failure to have God " s «word» in them (5:38) continues the thought, for Jewish teachers would immediately think of having Torah in them. 5931 But the sentence structure is parallel, as in 5:37bc: the word abiding in them corresponds to believing the one God sent to them. Jesus is the word, hence the Scriptures (5:39) can be truly embraced only in him (see introduction to prologue). For the Fourth Gospel, to reject the Word in flesh is to show that one does not heed the less complete revelation in the law, either ( 1:17–18). 5932 Jesus could therefore urge them to genuinely search the Scriptures in 5:39; more likely, he notes that they do search the Scriptures, but to no avai1. 5933 Searching the Law was an act of piety that often included returning to investigate it and implement what had been neglected (1Macc 14:14, though it uses εξεζτησε, from εκζητω, rather than εραυνω, as here; cf. John 7:52 ; Acts 17:11); the equivalent Hebrew term was applied to diligent study of Scripture. 5934 Such study was thought to bring life. 5935 Because they belong to the wrong sphere, however, they cannot understand the Scriptures, which testify to the one from above. 5936 While they think they have life in the Scriptures they are searching, 5937 they cannot have life apart from Jesus (5:40; see comment on 1:4), and John applies the other term for «searching» to their failure to seek Gods glory (5:44). |
| Thieves and wolves are often listed together as enemies of onés animals, 7422 and a keeper of animals who suspected a thief of stealing animals might find the «thief» to be a natural predator instead. 7423 In a Greek novel, one goatherd complained that no wolf had successfully seized any goats, but that now the enemy (invaders) had taken the goats and would harm them. 7424 Sheep were safer in a flock; once scattered, they became easier prey for attackers ( Ezek 34:8 ); God had complained that Israels leaders had allowed his flock to be scattered 7425 for lack of a genuinely concerned shepherd ( Jer 23:1–2 ; Ezek 34:5–6 ; cf. Ezek 34:21 ; Zech 11:16–17). 7426 God himself would gather and restore his scattered flock ( Jer 23:3 ; Ezek 34:11–16 ; cf. John 16:32–33 ). Here the wolf seeks to «snatch» members of the flock (10:13), but Jesus promises that no wolf can snatch them from his or his Father " s hand ( 10:28–29); a superhumanly empowered shepherd (contrast Gen 31:39 ), Jesus lost none of the flock the Father entrusted to him (6:39; 17:12; 18:9). 4B. The Shepherd " s Relationship with the Sheep (10:14–15) Jesus» sacrifice expresses his care for the sheep (10:11–13) as well as obedience to his Father (10:15,17). His «own» (τα μ) are those sheep the Father has given him (17:9–10), those who are his own (τ δια) mentioned earlier in the passage who are intimate with him. The theme of his relationship with the sheep picks up the image from 10:3–5 (see comment there) and provides a pivotal statement of the theme of knowing God that pervades the Fourth Gospel (see introduction). The healed man came to know Jesus; his opponents admitted that they lacked knowledge of him (9:29; see comment on 9:13–17). Background for the passage lies close at hand, given the likely assumption that John " s ideal audience was biblically literate. God summoned Israel to «know» him in terms of recognizing him and acknowledging his authority. 7427 When John speaks of «knowing» the shepherd " s voice, one could hear this phrase merely in terms of recognition. But the Scriptures could also use «knowing» God as part of the covenant motif (Exod 6:7), especially with regard to the new covenant ( Jer 24:7; 31:33–34 ). In the new covenant, such knowledge of God would stem from God " s word in his peoplés hearts ( Jer 31:33–34 ), and may allude also to the language of covenant marital intimacy ( Jer 31:32 ; Hos 5:4 ), a familiar image (e.g., Gen 4:1 ). 7428 That Jesus» own (his sheep) 7429 «know» him as the Father knows him and he knows the Father (10:14–15) indicates an intimacy that would exceed that of the biblical prophets. 7430 Given the behavior and misunderstandings of the disciples on a narrative level (and Jesus» acknowledgement of it, e.g., 13:38), and its contrast with the perfect relationship in which Jesus walks with the Father, it is doubtful that John wishes us to understand this equation in a quantitative sense even after his resurrection (cf. 1Cor 13:9,12 ). |
| When Jesus says that «all things» (πντα, neuter) that are his are also the Father " s (17:10), underlining the point of 17:7, he merely repeats the general wisdom of 16:15; the Father and Son are so intimate that they share everything in common. Likewise, the Son by inheritance is a lord over the Father " s house (cf. 8:35). In this context, he states this general principle to reinforce the more specific point of 17:9: the disciples for whom Jesus prays already belong to the Father as well as to himself (10:14, 28–29), and hence the Father will surely answer Jesus» prayer. Jesus is glorified in his followers (17:10; cf. 2 Thess 1:12) the same way the Father is: by their fruitfulness (15:8), especially by their love for one another (13:35) expressed in unity (17:21–23). Although the idea is less central to this chapter, he may also be glorified in their sufferings (21:19) and in their triumph following such sufferings (11:4; cf. 9:3). 2. Guarding His Own in the World (17:11–19) Though Jesus was leaving the world (17:11), he was sending the disciples into the world just as the Father had sent him into the world (17:18). Nevertheless, because they had his message, they were not of the world (17:14) but were being set apart by that message (17:17) as Jesus was set apart (17:19). Those whom the Father gave Jesus (17:9–10) now are again in the Father " s hands (17:11), except for the one destined to be lost (17:12). 2A. Separation from the World (17:11, 14–19) Although Jesus was leaving, his disciples would remain «in the world» (17:11; cf. 13:1), which carried with it the attendant challenge to be «in the world» yet not «of it» (17:14–18)–a task Israel usually proved unable to fulfill when confronted by pagan practices around it. The address «Holy Father» (17:11) is not unexpected in an early Jewish milieu 9445 but specifically fits this context: Jesus has been keeping the disciples separate from the world (17:12), and now the Father will continue to keep them set apart (17:11). 9446 God is the measure of holiness (cf. Rev 4:8), and whatever is «holy» is «separated» to him (e.g., Exod 28:36; 30:10, 32, 36–37; 31:14–15; 39:30; Lev 21:6–8 ). The goal of their being kept from the world is that they may be «one» (17:11; cf. 10:16; see comment on 17:21–23). Separation from the world naturally produces internal community cohesion (see comment on 15:18–25), but here the idea seems to be that the common unity with the Father and the Son, apart from the world " s quite contrary interests, yields unity among Jesus» followers (cf. 17:21–23). |
|
|
